Case of the Day: House v. S.P. Richards Corp.

The case of the day is House v. S.P. Richardson Corp. (S.D. Tex. 2014). Karl House was a truck driver. He delivered a container to S.P. Richards, and when he arrived to make the delivery, he unsealed the container and opened its doors. He claimed that when he opened the doors, a file cabinet fell out of the container and struck him.

House sued S.P. Richards in the Texas state court. S.P. Richards removed the case to the federal court, and House then added Empren S. de R.L. de C.V. and EDN Mexico, S. de R.L. ce C.V. as defendants; these two Mexican entities’ role in the case is not clear in the opinion. House sent the summons and complaint to the Mexican defendants by mail, and without a Spanish translation. The Mexican defendants moved to dismiss for insufficient service of process.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: House v. S.P. Richards Corp.

Case of the Day: Martinez v. Aero Caribbean

The case of the day is Martinez v. Aero Caribbean (N.D. Cal. 2014). Lorenzo Mendoza Martinez and others were the survivors of the victim of an airplane crash in Cuba. They sued Aero Caribbean, Empresa Aerocaribbean S.A., and Cubana De Aviacion S.A., which allegedly owned and operated the airplane and had their places of business in Cuba, for negligence and wrongful death.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Martinez v. Aero Caribbean

The Choice of Court Agreement Convention On The Verge

Friend of Letters Blogatory Pietro Franzina reports that the European Commission has adopted a proposal for the ratification of the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements by the EU. Under Article 31, two ratifications are necessary for the Convention to come into force, and Mexico has already ratified it, so assuming the Council accepts the proposal, the Convention is on the verge of finally coming into force.
(more…)

Continue ReadingThe Choice of Court Agreement Convention On The Verge

Case of the Day: Walia v. Aegis Center Point Developers

The case of the day is Walia v. Aegis Center Point Developers Pvt. Ltd. (N.D. Cal. 2014). According to the complaint, Aegis was in charge of a real estate project in India. It recruited Gurinder Walia to serve as a director, manage investors, and raise capital. Walia and Siddhartha Kumar were the managers of Aegis, and they agreed to share the profits equally. Walia’s claim was that Aegis and Kumar improperly appointed a new director and deprived him of profits.

Walia sued Kumar and Aegis in a court in Chandigarh, India, seeking a permanent injunction. But the Indian court dismissed his claim on the merits. Walia then sued in the Northern District of California. Aegis and Kumar moved to dismiss.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Walia v. Aegis Center Point Developers

Case of the Day: SEC v. China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics

The case of the day is SEC v. China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics (S.D.N.Y. 2014). The Securities and Exchange Commission sued Xuemei Li, the president and CEO of China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics, and Tianfu Li, the chairman and CEO of NIVS IntelliMedia Technology Group, Inc., for securities fraud. Both resided in China. The SEC sought leave to serve the two by alternate means under FRCP 4(f)(3). Specifically, the SEC sought leave to serve process by publication in the International New York Times and by e-mail.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: SEC v. China Intelligent Lighting and Electronics

Case of the Day: AQ Asset Management v. Levine

In the case of the day, AQ Asset Management LLC v. Levine (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2014), a Swiss national who had sued US defendants in the New York state courts found that he could not avoid the reach of a New York subpoena in a related case brought by the same US parties. In 2008, Markus Schumacher, the Swiss national, sued the City of New York, Paul Ware Jr., William C. Clifford, Antiquorum USA, Inc., and Evan Zimmerman in the New York Supreme Court. Schumacher’s claims are not made clear in today’s decision: they “arose from an August 2007 incident that took place at the offices of Antiquorum USA, where Schumacher had served as the chief operating officer for plaintiff Antiquorum S.A.” Two of the defendants in the 2008 lawsuit, Antiquorum and Zimmerman then sued Michale Levine, Habsburg Holdings Ltd., and Osvaldo Patrizzi, also in New York. The second suit was related to the first, though the decision doesn’t explain exactly how.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: AQ Asset Management v. Levine

Case of the Day: Samsung Electronic Co. v. Early Bird Savings

The case of the day is Samsung Electronic Co. v. Early Bird Savings (S.D. Cal. 2014). It raises an issue we haven’t seen in a while, namely, whether a temporary restraining order can be extended beyond the ordinarily permissible time to allow for service of process abroad.
(more…)

Continue ReadingCase of the Day: Samsung Electronic Co. v. Early Bird Savings